Originally
Published in American Thinker on May 10, 2014. Modified on November 19, 2015
It
is natural that organisms and organizations employ defense
mechanisms. When governments are confronted with the threat of budgets
cuts they must respond. A particularly effective technique has been
described as the "Firemen First Principle." This term was
coined by journalist Charles Peters in 1976. It states, "the public
will support [the Clever Bureaucrat's] valiant fight against the budget
reduction only if essential services are endangered. Thus, C.B. always picks on
teachers, policemen, firemen first." Essential services are the
first targets of a government faced with budget cuts. President Obama said
Republicans have a choice during the 2013 sequester debate: "Do you want
to see a bunch of first responders lose their jobs because you want to protect
some special interest tax loophole?" A classic example of this
technique was provided by the city of Ann Arbor. Faced with the opposition
to tax increases the city laid off firefighters. At the same time they
were funding an art project for $850,000 that failed to function. The dire
consequences of these cuts are dutifully reported by the media. Reporting
on the cuts to the Minnesota state budget the Associated Press asserted,
"The blind are losing reading services. A help line for the elderly has
gone silent. And poor families are scrambling after the state stopped
child-care subsidies."
In
order to illustrate this tragedy they mention Sonya Mills, a 39-year-old mother
of eight about to lose $3,600 a month in child care subsidies. In order to be
effective, these cuts must be highly visible and draconian; designed to cause
maximum inconvenience to the public. During the sequester controversy Congressman
Darrell Issa reported, "the Committee received information that proposed
budget adjustments submitted by an National Parks Service official in the field
to deal with sequestration impacts were rejected by NPS superiors in favor of
cuts that would be more visible and disruptive.” Some of these cuts have
crossed the line to sheer viciousness. Discussing cuts in cancer research
CNN anchorwoman, Dana Bash asked Senator Harry Reid, "If you can help one
child with cancer, why wouldn't you do it?" Reid responded,
"Why would we want to do that?" The Pentagon halted death benefits
for five service members killed over the weekend of the sequester. The
Pentagon press release stated, “The department does not currently have the
authority to pay death gratuities for the survivors of service members killed
in action – typically a cash payment of $100,000 paid within three days of the
death of a service member.” It took special congressional action to reinstate
these benefits. These cuts were essential because as House Minority Leader
Nancy Pelosi stated, "The cupboard is bare."
But
is the cupboard really bare? There appears to be a class of spending in
the back of the cupboard that has apparently been overlooked. This has
been described as "little, tiny 'porky amendments." Senator
Chuck Schumer told the Senate, “And let me say this, to all of the chattering
class, that so much focuses on those little, tiny ‘ yes, porky’ amendments: The
American people really don’t care.” Former Congressman David Obey once
referred the cost of one of these items as, "a lousy $8
million." What could be more important than death benefits for
deceased servicemen or cancer research? The National Science Foundation’s
spokeswoman, Deborah Wing claims that the “NSF strives to be good stewards of
taxpayers’ dollars.” How about a $384,949 federal study that looks at
“Plasticity in Duck Penis Length.” Or a grant for $876,752 to study
whether there is any benefit to sex among New Zealand mud snails. The National
Institutes of Health (NIH) has awarded $1.5 million to study biological and
social factors for why “three-quarters” of lesbians are obese and why gay males
are not. The Department of the Interior’s Fish and Wildlife Service has awarded
$3.8 million for an “African Elephant Conservation” grant that, in part, aims
to “decrease human-elephant conflict.” There is a marmoset monkeys erection
study. Several volumes could be filled with dubious studies by the “good
stewards” of billions of taxpayers’ dollars. The National Institute of Mental
Health alone spends roughly $1 billion a year on “academic research.”
Without
oversight government stewards of taxpayer dollars frequently behave like the
leaders of Bell, California. The city’s manager of this city of 38,000 earned
an annual salary of almost $800,000. This was partially financed by the
sale of two general obligation bond issues totaling $50 million. Federal
officials’ salaries are regulated. Therefore they must be rewarded with
other perquisites like bonuses and paid vacations or “conferences.” The
DOJ spent $121 million on conferences in fiscal 2008 and 2009. The IRS
spent $48,631,800 on 225 conferences in fiscal years 2010-2012. The
Department of Veterans Affairs spent more than $6 million on two “conferences.”
Hundreds
of government agencies spend billions of dollars of these “conferences.”The
attitude of these stewards of tax dollars is perhaps best illustrated by the
General Services Administration’s former Regional Commissioner, Jeff Neely.
Neely was responsible for the 2010 GSA’s conference held in Las Vegas costing
$823,000. Neely wrote to his friends, “We’ll get you guys a room near us,
and we’ll pick up the room tab… I know I’m bad, but as Deb and I often say, why
not enjoy it while we have it and while we can. Ain’t gonna last forever.”
Government
officials are extremely frugal when they are dealing with their own finances.
They are not so concerned when dealing with public funds. IRS workers who don’t
pay their taxes still get bonuses. At the 2009 Wall Street Journal’s Economics
Conference Special Assistant to the Secretary of Energy, Matt Rogers, stated,
“I’m Matt Rogers. I am the Special Assistant to the Secretary of Energy
and I have $134 billion that I have to disperse between now and the end of
December.” Paul Hollander, a “venture capitalist,” responded to this in
an email, “Matt Rogers is about to get treated like a hooker dropped into a
prison exercise yard.” When he shared this with Rogers, he was relieved
the find that Rogers and his friends laughed at the suggestion. But this
was the whole point in Rogers making this statement.
The
VA is currently facing a $2.6 billion budget shortfall. VA Deputy Secretary Sloan Gibson told
members of the House Veterans’ Affairs Committee, "We are going to do the right thing for veterans and be
good stewards of taxpayer dollars.” Gibson
also said, “We will have to start denying care to some veterans.” In 2012 Fox News reported the VA was
under investigation over two conferences in Orlando that cost $5 million and
featured a video parody of the movie “Patton,”
and $84,000 spent on “branded
pens, highlighters, hand sanitizers and USB drives.”
While the VA is
contemplating denying care for veterans White House spokesman Josh Earnest announced
the United States will direct $4.5 billion to help address the dire conditions
inside Syria and in refugee camps scattered across the region.
No comments:
Post a Comment